Subject: [6lowpan] friday's agenda

From: "Schumacher Christian Peter Pii" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 00:01:32 +0100

Carsten and Geoff, what is the status of the official agenda for 6lowpan
WG meeting on friday?

Regards
Christian

_______________________________________________
6lowpan mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan

---

From: Carsten Bormann <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 14:55:40 -0600

On Mar 19 2006, at 17:01, Christian Schumacher wrote:
> Carsten and Geoff, what is the status of the official agenda for  
> 6lowpan WG meeting on friday?
Well, I think that status is called "very very late" in English...

An initial draft of the agenda is at

	http://6lowpan.tzi.org/6lowpan_20at_20IETF_2065

Please also follow the "recharter" link and send comments on the  
draft charter to this list.
There are names of possible contributors in the proposed charter --  
these are not meant to be exclusive, and we would like to hear which  
ones of the potential charter items each of you wants to work on.

Apart from the Friday WG meeting, we plan to have a 6lowpan dinner on  
Thursday (after the plenary) -- please RSVP to Christian if you want  
to participate.

Gruesse, Carsten

---

From: "Ki-Hyung Kim" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 08:01:13 +0900

I will participate the dinner on thursday.

--
__
Ki-Hyung Kim
Associate Professor
Division of Information and Computer Eng.,
Ajou University, Suwon, Korea 442-749
Tel:+82-31-219-2433, http://ilab.ajou.ac.kr
_______________________________________________
6lowpan mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan

---

From: "Ki-Hyung Kim" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 09:37:55 +0900

Geoff and Carsten,
On 6lowpan WG meeting friday, I would like to request a 30-minute
demonstration of a 6lowpan prototype in which users on the Internet can
directly access 6lowpan devices via a gateway.

The web page of the prototype is www.6lowpan.net.
The webserver is currently collecting temperature measurement from IPv6
enabled 6lowpan devices via a gateway.
Additionally, a user will be able to access the 6lowpan devices directly via
a client program, not only via a web server.

In the 30-minute demonstration, I would like to briefly present the overall
architecture of the prototype, including the compliance to the current
format document, the routing protocol, gateway, etc.

---

From: "Samita Chakrabarti" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 16:41:35 -0800

Hi Carsten:

I wonder if we have time for 6lowpan-ND draft update presentation
this time?  As per interim meeting discussion, we have submitted
a new draft.  Would like to receive wg input on that.

Thanks,
-Samita

---

From: Carsten Bormann <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 19:05:01 -0600

> a new draft.  Would like to receive wg input on that.

Sure; this would be under the heading "new work" of the provisional  
agenda.
I've put you down there (assuming you are referring to draft- 
chakrabarti-6lowpan-ipv6-nd-01.txt).

We still need to allocate time, what's your time requirement?
(Quick update + discussion time?)

Gruesse, Carsten

---

From: "Samita Chakrabarti" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 17:23:38 -0800

> Sure; this would be under the heading "new work" of the provisional

Thanks!

> chakrabarti-6lowpan-ipv6-nd-01.txt).

I was not sure whether I'd be attending this IETF; Erik Nordmark kindly
agreed
to present this time as well. Yes, I was referring to the
chakrabarti-6lowpan-ipv6-nd-01.txt.

> (Quick update + discussion time?)

My guestimate would be 15 - 20 minutes.  Working on the slides.

Thanks,
-Samita

---

From: "Ki-Hyung Kim" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 01:40:18 +0900

Geoff and Carsten,

I would like to ask the time slots for our proposals in the 6lowpan WG
agenda.
Initially, I have asked 30-minute demonstration of our testbed.
Could I refine the request as follows: (If you think that the allocatable
time to us is not enough, I could re-arrange the items in the
priority-based)

1) Optimization of the Adhoc Routing Protocol for 6lowpans
15 minutes
I would like to present the updated version of LOAD document and DYMO-low
about the received comments.

2) Scalability of 6LoWPAN (routing and addressing issues)
15 minutes
In this slot, I would like to raise the issue of the scalability with regard
to the 6lowpan deliverables.  I would like to mention the meaning of the
scalability in that IPv6 is scalable, but the table-based routing (eg. ad
hoc routing) is not.

3) Service Discovery Protocol for 6LoWPAN and Interoperability of 6LoWPAN
15 minutes

4) Demonstration of the testbed (www.6ylowpan.net)
15 minutes

---

From: Geoff Mulligan <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 09:50:55 -0700

I will be at dinner.

	geoff

---

From: Behcet Sarikaya <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 11:48:15 -0800

Hi Carsten,
  I would like a 5 minute slot to present my draft on serial forwarding.
Thanks.

--behcet

---

From: Carsten Bormann <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 16:17:58 -0600

Hi Kim,

> I would like to present the updated version of LOAD document and  
> DYMO-low about the received comments.

The view of the people present at the Interim was that this subject  
is very relevant.
When you say "updated", I assume that this is about what has changed  
since the Interim?

Can we split this into:
1) discussion about the way forward (in the rechartering segment), and
2) technical specifics.
For 1, in particular, we need to understand what the specific  
"optimizations" are that we want to apply to these protocols -- why  
can't we use the MANET protocols as they are and what is the best way  
to achieve long-term sustainability in a world where both the  
underlying L2 network and the MANET base protocols still are changing.

> In this slot, I would like to raise the issue of the scalability  
> with regard to the 6lowpan deliverables.  I would like to mention  
> the meaning of the scalability in that IPv6 is scalable, but the  
> table-based routing (eg. ad hoc routing) is not.

One of the results of the Interim was that we didn't see this as one  
of the priority items to be picked up by the WG.
Do you have any new considerations that would lead the people present  
at the Interim to reconsider this?

>  3) Service Discovery Protocol for 6LoWPAN and Interoperability of  

As a result of the Interim, we said we wanted to discuss service  
discovery in the context of application configuration and  
installation/commissioning.
So, for the rechartering segment, I would be interested in seeing  
thoughts on how to achieve this.

At the Interim, there was little that we thought the WG needed to  
pick up from the Interoperability presentation.
Again, we should focus on updates since the Interim, and on the  
aspects that will influence the charter discussion.

>  4) Demonstration of the testbed (www.6ylowpan.net)

Can we do this outside the WG meeting (e.g., from 08:40 to 08:55 or so)?
I'm very interested in seeing this, but I don't see us spending WG  
meeting time on a testbed demonstration.

Gruesse, Carsten

---

From: Carsten Bormann <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 16:22:10 -0600

Hi Behcet,

>  I would like a 5 minute slot to present my draft on serial  

I assume this is about draft-sarikaya-6lowpan-forwarding-00.txt

It would seem this is a bit out of (both current and future) scope,  
but then I have seen some quite strong requirements in this space in  
some real-world 6lowpan application environments.

I've put this segment at the end of the "new work" section.
See you on Friday!

Gruesse, Carsten

---

From: "Ki-Hyung Kim" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 05:58:02 +0900

Hi Carsten,

My answers are in line.

> When you say "updated", I assume that this is about what has changed

Your assumption is correct.

> underlying L2 network and the MANET base protocols still are changing.

That's a good idea. I will try to split the presentation.

> at the Interim to reconsider this?

I think that the explanation of this issue at the interim is not enough
because of the shortage of time, and we didn't even have a chance to
discuss the necessity of this issue.  I still believe that this issue is
very urgent and should be included in the rechartering items on this round.
That's why I want to ask you of the chance to explain the necessity and
importance of this issue in this WG session.

> meeting time on a testbed demonstration.

I think the demonstration of the testbed could be short (just 5 minutes
might be OK for the presentation of the architecture and implementation of
6lowpan).  If you still think that it might be better to do the
demonstration before the WG, it is OK.

Gruesse, Carsten